Refine
Year of Publication
- 2010 (18) (remove)
Document Type
- Working Paper (7)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (5)
- Contribution to Periodical (3)
- Report (3)
Division
The papers for this special issue were originally contributed to the 2nd International Wuppertal Colloquium on "Sustainable Growth, Resource Productivity and Sustainable Industrial Policy - Recent Findings, new Approaches for Strategies and Policies" that was held from 10 to 12 September 2009 in Wuppertal, Germany. The intensive discussion during the Colloqium and the subsequent rigorous review process have helped to facilitate this process - we wish to thank all participants and contributers, as well as Sevan Hambarsoomian and Deniz Erdem for administrative support.
This paper reviews the current EU policy framework in view of its impact on hydrogen and fuel cell development. It screens EU energy policies, EU regulatory policies and EU spending policies. Key questions addressed are as follows: to what extent is the current policy framework conducive to hydrogen and fuel cell development? What barriers and inconsistencies can be identified? How can policies potentially promote hydrogen and fuel cells in Europe, taking into account the complex evolution of such a potentially disruptive technology? How should the EU policy framework be reformed in view of a strengthened and more coherent approach towards full deployment, taking into account recent technology-support activities? This paper concludes that the current EU policy framework does not hinder hydrogen development. Yet it does not constitute a strong push factor either. EU energy policies have the strongest impact on hydrogen and fuel cell development even though their potential is still underexploited. Regulatory policies have a weak but positive impact on hydrogen. EU spending policies show some inconsistencies. However, the large-scale market development of hydrogen and fuel cells will require a new policy approach which comprises technology-specific support as well as a supportive policy framework with a special regional dimension.
This paper undertakes a step to explaining the international economics of resource productivity. It argues that natural resources are back on the agenda for four reasons: the demand on world markets continues to increase, the environmental constraints to using resources are relevant throughout their whole life cycle, the access to critical metals could become a barrier to the low carbon economy, and uneven patterns of use will probably become a source of resource conflicts. Thus, the issue is also of relevance for the transition to a low carbon economy. "Material Flow Analysis" is introduced as a tool to measure the use of natural resources within economies and internationally; such measurement methodology now is being harmonized under OECD auspices. For these reasons, the paper argues that resource productivity - that is the efficiency of using natural resources to produce goods and services in the economy - will become one of the key determinants of economic success and human well-being. An empirical chapter gives evidence on time series of resource productivity increases across a number of economies. Introducing the notion of "material flow innovation", the paper also discusses the innovation dynamics and issues of competitiveness. However, as the paper concludes, market barriers make a case for effective resource policies that should provide incentives for knowledge generation and get the prices right.
This article addresses informational barriers to energy efficiency. It is a widely acknowledged result that an energy efficiency gap exists implying that the level of energy efficiency is at an inefficiently low level. Several barriers to energy efficiency create this gap and the presence of asymmetric information is likely to be one such barrier. The article finds that problems of moral hazard and adverse selection indeed can help explain the seemingly low levels of energy efficiency. The theory reveals two implications to policies on energy efficiency. First, the development of measures to enable contractual parties to base remuneration on energy performance must be enhanced, and second, the information on technologies and the education of consumers and installers on energy efficiency must be increased. Finally, it is found that the preferred EU policy instrument on energy efficiency, so far, seems to be the use of minimum requirements. Less used in EU legislation is the use of measuring and verification as well as the use of certifications. Therefore, it is concluded that the EU should consider an increased use of these instruments.